Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This paper investigated the blast behavior of a low‐rise composite steel structure of three stories subjected to internal and external explosions for the same explosive charge of 250 kg TNT. A comparison of three various blast scenarios is aimed at better understanding how blast waves propagate in confined risk zones and their damage effects on far and exposed elements to an explosive charge. Evaluation of the damage level and the overall response of the proposed numerical model is done by estimating the adequacy of structural members subjected to blast loading using general limits in attempting to check the structure's strength and regularity. The analysis was based on load combinations and damage criteria according to the Unified Facilities Criteria which are general design approaches suitable for civil design applications in forecasting blast loads and structural system responses. The overall behavior of this structure was simulated based on a dynamic analysis by the direct simulation approach, which was chosen for modeling blast loads using the Friedlander blast load equation, and the simpler, less expensive, more accurate, and realistic A.T.‐BLAST model to deduce the simplified blast‐wave overpressure profile. The material nonlinearity at a high strain rate using the Johnson‐Cook strength and concrete plasticity damage model is studied dynamically using ABAQUS finite element code to simulate the explicit dynamic nonlinear analysis. The overall response of the proposed numerical model was evaluated by estimating the adequacy of structural members, considering the blast load as the initial cause of failure, such as axial plastic strain, internal forces limits, maximum deformation, support rotation, demand‐capacity‐ratio (DCR shear/moment ), drift index and material damage model. The position of the explosive charge played an important role in determining the rate at which the structural element begins to plastic strains, displacements, moments, or rotations beyond the limits, and then key elements should be considered in structural design against progressive collapse. Results showed that steel members exhibit early indicators of failure, such as buckling necking, shear tearing, or plastic hinges, whereas concrete slabs break up immediately due to brittleness. DCR moment values successfully showed the columns in which the first plastic joint can occur, whereas DCR shear values signaled the onset of shear failure at connections. Besides, plastic hinges played an important role in dissipating energy and preventing total structural collapse via the Strong Column‐Weak Beam design concept, which appears repeatedly in this study. The structure is a well‐designed and ductile building capable of supporting higher loads and is considered to be repairable and intact.
Sharaf et al. (Sun,) studied this question.